@IsabelHardman: If you’re a Labour MP who wants party to scare Tories, the fiesta of fun Osborne is holding in Commons over fiscal charter must be sickening
@IsabelHardman: Of course, out-Osborning Osborne would involve doing a massive dance involving trumpets bigger than the one Chancellor just did in Chamber
Judging by that Prospect poll, people essentially see Corbyn as another Miliband. They see him as far less competent than Cameron, but at the same time, more in touch with "people like you", more trustworthy, and less closed-minded and willing to listen to others' opinions.
Obviously being seen as equivalent to the leader who just lost an election is not by any means great, but should give pause for thought to those who think the Tories are guaranteed for some landslide in 2020.
But much less patriotic, also.
Overall, I'd say Corbyn's ratings are poor, but not as poor as might have been expected.
@rustinpeace00: McDonnell completely falling to pieces at the box. I genuinely cannot believe that this is what remains of Labour in 2015. #FiscalCharter
The Germans should have atoned by allowing eastern Europeans into the country in 2004 like we did in the UK. Instead they refused, despite having a Social Democrat / Green government at the time.
''If I read this piece right, it's saying that even when the people of Europe agree with Britain's positions, they won't agree to adopt them because they dislike us.''
Does the article say WHY they dislike us????
We're nasty. Didn't take migrants, ask for things all the time, I think.
....
Unless we take hundreds of thousands of migrants, we're not really going to affect the situation. Given that is clearly ridiculous, we need to look at solutions that don't involve trying to relocate huge swathes of the Syrian population to Europe. Taking some number between what we have already taking and hundreds of thousands isn't good policy. It's just virtue signalling.
I don't see any reason why we should allow this country's immigration policy to be made in Berlin, and it would be incendiary if it was.
Given the rate at which German public opinion is turning, I doubt if Merkel is even carrying her own people with her.
But is that true? CDU/CSU polling seems very stable and only 33% want her to resign.
I think she's playing to some need for national atonement deep in the German pschy.
55% of Germans want to take fewer asylum seekers, according to Yougov. That 33% will only rise.
The people who do seem to have some need for national atonement, for some reason, are the Swedes.
@MrJacHart: Wish BBC would go to a wide shot so I can see the faces of Labour MPs watching their Shd Chancellor destroy their credibility #FiscalCharter
BUT. The migrants have arrived. There seems to be a collective amnesia that large numbers of migrants had arrived long before Angela Merkel gave her invitation for them to throng to Germany (indeed, she was prompted by this). Those migrants need to be sheltered and housed. Part of what needs doing is the sheltering and housing - the treating of the symptoms. That treating of the symptoms will have real benefit for real people. Whatever you might think of Angela Merkel's actions, there are another 26 member states in the EU who also didn't issue that invitation, many of whom also are struggling with the sheer weight of numbers.
We should play a part in treating the symptoms too. Standing idly by is shameful.
They need to be sheltered and housed in a way that doesn't cause even more to make the dangerous journey. i.e. in the camps. By paying for that to happen, we are alleviating the symptoms. Just in a sensible way.
Just where exactly would you shelter and house them? Which "camps"? Bear in mind these people are already in the EU.
A bus can drive to Turkey from Hungary...
And the Turks can refuse to accept the return leg. Given how many refugees they are already looking after, who could blame them?
The Germans should have atoned by allowing eastern Europeans into the country in 2004 like we did in the UK. Instead they refused, despite having a Social Democrat / Green government at the time.
''If I read this piece right, it's saying that even when the people of Europe agree with Britain's positions, they won't agree to adopt them because they dislike us.''
Does the article say WHY they dislike us????
We're nasty. Didn't take migrants, ask for things all the time, I think.
....
Unless we take hundreds of thousands of migrants, we're not really going to affect the situation. Given that is clearly ridiculous, we need to look at solutions that don't involve trying to relocate huge swathes of the Syrian population to Europe. Taking some number between what we have already taking and hundreds of thousands isn't good policy. It's just virtue signalling.
I don't see any reason why we should allow this country's immigration policy to be made in Berlin, and it would be incendiary if it was.
Given the rate at which German public opinion is turning, I doubt if Merkel is even carrying her own people with her.
But is that true? CDU/CSU polling seems very stable and only 33% want her to resign.
I think she's playing to some need for national atonement deep in the German pschy.
55% of Germans want to take fewer asylum seekers, according to Yougov. That 33% will only rise.
The people who do seem to have some need for national atonement, for some reason, are the Swedes.
If large scale immigration is inevitable, Eastern Europeans are the best of them.
McDonnell is appalling - he is wholly unsuited to high office, or indeed any office. Labour must wake up and rid themselves of Corbyn - McDonnell - Watson before the Country ends up with only the SNP as an opposition.
@RobDotHutton: "Embarrassing, embarrassing, embarrassing, embarrassing, embarrassing, embarrassing, yes it is." John McDonnell on his own U-turn.
With this level of self-scrutiny and general honesty he'll join the Tory party soon.
Corbyn has come up with some stuff along the same lines.
Interesting, and 'good for them' if they are prepared to admit that from time to time as a maverick back-bencher they may have spouted absolute nonsense.
McDonnell has made a few somewhat risible claims about his economic expertise. If he steps back, takes the responsibility seriously, and looks afresh at issues that he really might shape then he gets well onto the first rung of some degree of respect from my point of view.
If Labour were to reposition themselves as the party of careful examination of the facts, and decisions based on those facts primarily they'd even risk getting my vote.
Bit worried with about the Corbyn fella, resurrected from the back-benches, and paying for our political sins. Beardy too!
BUT. The migrants have arrived. There seems to be a collective amnesia that large numbers of migrants had arrived long before Angela Merkel gave her invitation for them to throng to Germany (indeed, she was prompted by this). Those migrants need to be sheltered and housed. Part of what needs doing is the sheltering and housing - the treating of the symptoms. That treating of the symptoms will have real benefit for real people. Whatever you might think of Angela Merkel's actions, there are another 26 member states in the EU who also didn't issue that invitation, many of whom also are struggling with the sheer weight of numbers.
We should play a part in treating the symptoms too. Standing idly by is shameful.
They need to be sheltered and housed in a way that doesn't cause even more to make the dangerous journey. i.e. in the camps. By paying for that to happen, we are alleviating the symptoms. Just in a sensible way.
Just where exactly would you shelter and house them? Which "camps"? Bear in mind these people are already in the EU.
A bus can drive to Turkey from Hungary...
And the Turks can refuse to accept the return leg. Given how many refugees they are already looking after, who could blame them?
Can they refuse the ones who left Turkey?
It doesn't have to accept asylum-seekers from outside Europe:
"Due to the geographical limitation to the 1951 Refugee Convention maintained by the Government of Turkey, under which it is not obliged to apply the Convention to refugees from outside Europe, UNHCR plays a critical role in addressing the protection needs of all non-European asylum-seekers in the country. The Office intervenes with the Turkish authorities in an effort to ensure that asylum-seekers are not detained or subjected to and are given access to national procedures for “temporary asylum”. For those in need of international protection, UNHCR pursues durable solutions, particularly resettlement."
So in theory at least it could unleash all the current asylum-seekers in Turkey on Europe. It certainly doesn't need to accept those being returned by the EU.
Showing willing to help friends in times of crisis is never a bad thing to do. Whether we like it or not (and we don't), hundreds of thousands have already descended on Europe. We can wash our hands of these migrants and leave others to sink under their weight. Or we can help a bit more.
We should help other EU countries a bit more. It's unsurprising that shrugging our shoulders, pointing to our island status and turning our backs on the problem has not made us popular.
Like. "I cannot prevent a tragedy altogether so I shall do nothing to alleviate it" has always been a disreputable argument. Yes, I understand that we help with funds for camps near the border. But there is a specific problem with the refugees already in Europe. Do we really feel that we shouldn't help deal with their cases?
The issue is that, without preventing more people arriving, taking those on the border just creates a pull factor.
To put it bluntly: more people will die if you encourage more to make the journey.
Agreed x1000
Problem for the handwringing do-gooders is that they are unwilling to put a number on how many migrants they think we should take. Even if the Tories agreed to take 100k per year it would not be enough for them.
The thing is though that the Tories have come up with the perfect riposte to this which is to take the refugees directly from the camps whilst making it clear they will not take those arriving under their own steam after dangerous journeys. By doing this they are eliminating that particular pull factor whilst still helping those in need.
The only thing I am surprised by is that the Tories do not make much more of this - emphasising that those encouraging migration by accepting the migrants are guilty of complicity in the deaths of countless more people in the Mediterranean.
Some of the most persecuted are the middle east Christians. They often take shelter in homes and Churches rather than official camps, as these are often also quite persecutory. Taking just from official camps would exclude them.
Barnabas fund is supporting safe havens, with the support of some prominent clergy:
"Zac Goldsmith urged to withdraw paedophile ring allegations Ex-Tory MP Harvey Proctor says Goldsmith should rethink mayoral bid unless he retracts claims of VIP abuse at Richmond guest house"
BUT. The migrants have arrived. There seems to be a collective amnesia that large numbers of migrants had arrived long before Angela Merkel gave her invitation for them to throng to Germany (indeed, she was prompted by this). Those migrants need to be sheltered and housed. Part of what needs doing is the sheltering and housing - the treating of the symptoms. That treating of the symptoms will have real benefit for real people. Whatever you might think of Angela Merkel's actions, there are another 26 member states in the EU who also didn't issue that invitation, many of whom also are struggling with the sheer weight of numbers.
We should play a part in treating the symptoms too. Standing idly by is shameful.
They need to be sheltered and housed in a way that doesn't cause even more to make the dangerous journey. i.e. in the camps. By paying for that to happen, we are alleviating the symptoms. Just in a sensible way.
Just where exactly would you shelter and house them? Which "camps"? Bear in mind these people are already in the EU.
A bus can drive to Turkey from Hungary...
And the Turks can refuse to accept the return leg. Given how many refugees they are already looking after, who could blame them?
Can they refuse the ones who left Turkey?
It doesn't have to accept asylum-seekers from outside Europe:
"Due to the geographical limitation to the 1951 Refugee Convention maintained by the Government of Turkey, under which it is not obliged to apply the Convention to refugees from outside Europe, UNHCR plays a critical role in addressing the protection needs of all non-European asylum-seekers in the country. The Office intervenes with the Turkish authorities in an effort to ensure that asylum-seekers are not detained or subjected to and are given access to national procedures for “temporary asylum”. For those in need of international protection, UNHCR pursues durable solutions, particularly resettlement."
So in theory at least it could unleash all the current asylum-seekers in Turkey on Europe. It certainly doesn't need to accept those being returned by the EU.
Just sums up the cosy money making schemes the government has in place with its chums.
This seems like a bit of a childish argument. What do you mean 'chums'? You do realise that contracts are not let out to friends, they go through a competitive process and recommendations given by a senior civil servant. In this case i understand that Serco have a contract. The cost of the stretch limo (crass by any sense) was coming from serco not the taxpayer directly. Extra cost or otherwise. It might have been cheaper to hire the stretch limo then it would be a taxi for seven people, which again might have been cheaper than a minibus and driver. A minibus and driver might not have been available, and the alternative was this or putting them up in a hotel for another night.
The company that provides the normal transport might be the same company that provides these kind of limos and that was the only one in the pool at that time.
LOL, I take you are on the gravy train , their chums get the deals , £3000 for a taxi rather than £50 on the bus. Yes all above board and sure nobody could have done it for less. PS , you obviously know well these companies that magically win these contracts are stuffed with ex politicians, chums and civil servants etc.
There are very few countries in the world and probably none in the Developed World where people would not go to jail for the sort of high level, institutional corruption that exists in the UK.
Perhaps that's why the Labour Party was invented - a good way to create fictional arguments where the Liberals actually appeared to have a more free trade, free market, lower corruption outlook. While most countries invoked laws over the last 100 years to prevent this sort of Cronyism, it continues as strongly as ever in the UK.
When did the UK last send an politician to jail for corruptly awarding contracts?
Some of the most persecuted are the middle east Christians. They often take shelter in homes and Churches rather than official camps, as these are often also quite persecutory. Taking just from official camps would exclude them.
Barnabas fund is supporting safe havens, with the support of some prominent clergy:
My apologies, I wasn't referring just to official camps necessarily - in fact I was not even aware there were official and unofficial camps. If you note I made no mention of 'official' camps in my original posting. It is not beyond the wit of those organising airlifts of refugees into the UK to make sure that as many people as possible get an equal chance to be considered. What is important is that the refugees are taken from camps in the countries bordering the war zone rather than accepted once they have taken up the offer of the smugglers and made dangerous journeys into the heart of Europe.
Revenue £4 billion Cost of Sales Just over £4 Bn General overheads £600 M "Exceptional items" £650m
Other stuff
etc...
Loss for the year 1.35Bn; Change in equity -1.3Bn.
Equity at yr End -£66 M.
The new MD (Rupert Soames, a grandson of Winston Churchill and a very well respected figure) is doing the standard thing of writing off vast amounts of historic problems in one go.
Only in the UK could the Managing Director of the biggest beneficiary of government largesse be the brother/cousin of at least two MPs and the Grandon/Nephew/Son of yet more.
@faisalislam: Osborne asks @CarolineLucas "when do you stop borrowing?"...she says "you stop borrowing when you cant afford to pay it back". Tory laughter
That's hilarious. I guess it's the Louis XVI school of economics.
Recognising of course that virtually no one would watch this debate live (I'm not, and if they couldn't convince me to watch it, not many others will), and that fewer still will be persuadable because of it, what is the best/worst case scenario here? There doesn't seem likely to be an enormous rebellion, so is it just a case of improving Labour morale? Is McDonnell really bad, and if he is, would anyone not already of that view in the party feel so and convince them to take action, or is it priced in?
Revenue £4 billion Cost of Sales Just over £4 Bn General overheads £600 M "Exceptional items" £650m
Other stuff
etc...
Loss for the year 1.35Bn; Change in equity -1.3Bn.
Equity at yr End -£66 M.
The new MD (Rupert Soames, a grandson of Winston Churchill and a very well respected figure) is doing the standard thing of writing off vast amounts of historic problems in one go.
Only in the UK could the Managing Director of the biggest beneficiary of government largesse be the brother/cousin of at least two MPs and the Grandon/Nephew/Son of yet more.
I seriously doubt that only in the UK could something like that be the case.
It is because of the real sense of despair that I almost feel sorry for the sensible members of the Labour party. Almost for a second and then the laughter starts. We have now had months of this from Labour with many many months to look forward to. The Conservatives are actually struggling to be noticed in News and Political programmes. There are just so many car crashes going on inside Labour. But NickMP thinks its fine...
Revenue £4 billion Cost of Sales Just over £4 Bn General overheads £600 M "Exceptional items" £650m
Other stuff
etc...
Loss for the year 1.35Bn; Change in equity -1.3Bn.
Equity at yr End -£66 M.
The new MD (Rupert Soames, a grandson of Winston Churchill and a very well respected figure) is doing the standard thing of writing off vast amounts of historic problems in one go.
Only in the UK could the Managing Director of the biggest beneficiary of government largesse be the brother/cousin of at least two MPs and the Grandon/Nephew/Son of yet more.
I seriously doubt that only in the UK could something like that be the case.
I don't think anyone who is grousing about the exceptional level of UK corruption has ever been to France, Spain, Italy, Portugal...never mind Russia!
Revenue £4 billion Cost of Sales Just over £4 Bn General overheads £600 M "Exceptional items" £650m
Other stuff
etc...
Loss for the year 1.35Bn; Change in equity -1.3Bn.
Equity at yr End -£66 M.
The new MD (Rupert Soames, a grandson of Winston Churchill and a very well respected figure) is doing the standard thing of writing off vast amounts of historic problems in one go.
Only in the UK could the Managing Director of the biggest beneficiary of government largesse be the brother/cousin of at least two MPs and the Grandon/Nephew/Son of yet more.
I seriously doubt that only in the UK could something like that be the case.
I don't think anyone who is grousing about the exceptional level of UK corruption has ever been to France, Spain, Italy, Portugal...never mind Russia!
Just sums up the cosy money making schemes the government has in place with its chums.
This seems like a bit of a childish argument. What do you mean 'chums'? You do realise that contracts are not let out to friends, they go through a competitive process and recommendations given by a senior civil servant. In this case i understand that Serco have a contract. The cost of the stretch limo (crass by any sense) was coming from serco not the taxpayer directly. Extra cost or otherwise. It might have been cheaper to hire the stretch limo then it would be a taxi for seven people, which again might have been cheaper than a minibus and driver. A minibus and driver might not have been available, and the alternative was this or putting them up in a hotel for another night.
The company that provides the normal transport might be the same company that provides these kind of limos and that was the only one in the pool at that time.
LOL, I take you are on the gravy train , their chums get the deals , £3000 for a taxi rather than £50 on the bus. Yes all above board and sure nobody could have done it for less. PS , you obviously know well these companies that magically win these contracts are stuffed with ex politicians, chums and civil servants etc.
There are very few countries in the world and probably none in the Developed World where people would not go to jail for the sort of high level, institutional corruption that exists in the UK.
Perhaps that's why the Labour Party was invented - a good way to create fictional arguments where the Liberals actually appeared to have a more free trade, free market, lower corruption outlook. While most countries invoked laws over the last 100 years to prevent this sort of Cronyism, it continues as strongly as ever in the UK.
When did the UK last send an politician to jail for corruptly awarding contracts?
Some of the most persecuted are the middle east Christians. They often take shelter in homes and Churches rather than official camps, as these are often also quite persecutory. Taking just from official camps would exclude them.
Barnabas fund is supporting safe havens, with the support of some prominent clergy:
My apologies, I wasn't referring just to official camps necessarily - in fact I was not even aware there were official and unofficial camps. If you note I made no mention of 'official' camps in my original posting. It is not beyond the wit of those organising airlifts of refugees into the UK to make sure that as many people as possible get an equal chance to be considered. What is important is that the refugees are taken from camps in the countries bordering the war zone rather than accepted once they have taken up the offer of the smugglers and made dangerous journeys into the heart of Europe.
The Archbishop has been directly raising the issue with the PM:
Syrian Christians are least likely to be able to return to their homes, least safe in refugee camps (as these are often Islamist recruiting gounds) and most likely to assimilate here. To me it is a no-brainer to give them priority over the young men in Calais.
Revenue £4 billion Cost of Sales Just over £4 Bn General overheads £600 M "Exceptional items" £650m
Other stuff
etc...
Loss for the year 1.35Bn; Change in equity -1.3Bn.
Equity at yr End -£66 M.
The new MD (Rupert Soames, a grandson of Winston Churchill and a very well respected figure) is doing the standard thing of writing off vast amounts of historic problems in one go.
Only in the UK could the Managing Director of the biggest beneficiary of government largesse be the brother/cousin of at least two MPs and the Grandon/Nephew/Son of yet more.
I seriously doubt that only in the UK could something like that be the case.
I don't think anyone who is grousing about the exceptional level of UK corruption has ever been to France, Spain, Italy, Portugal...never mind Russia!
Surpisingly (to my mind anyway) Norway is rife with claims of nepotism with many of the top politicians and civil servants coming from a few Oslo based families.
I suppose this is the same sort of thing as Sweden ostensibly having one of the highest rates of rape and sexual harassment in the world. Of course that's nonsense, it just reflects the fact that they take reporting it much more seriously than elsewhere.
Revenue £4 billion Cost of Sales Just over £4 Bn General overheads £600 M "Exceptional items" £650m
Other stuff
etc...
Loss for the year 1.35Bn; Change in equity -1.3Bn.
Equity at yr End -£66 M.
The new MD (Rupert Soames, a grandson of Winston Churchill and a very well respected figure) is doing the standard thing of writing off vast amounts of historic problems in one go.
Only in the UK could the Managing Director of the biggest beneficiary of government largesse be the brother/cousin of at least two MPs and the Grandon/Nephew/Son of yet more.
I seriously doubt that only in the UK could something like that be the case.
I don't think anyone who is grousing about the exceptional level of UK corruption has ever been to France, Spain, Italy, Portugal...never mind Russia!
Surpisingly (to my mind anyway) Norway is rife with claims of nepotism with many of the top politicians and civil servants coming from a few Oslo based families.
I still think that this is a pointless and potentially harmful piece of legislation but you cannot deny that Osborne is getting his money's worth in humiliating the Labour party.
There are times when I wonder if Osborne is actually very nice. Tonight is one of those times.
Some of the most persecuted are the middle east Christians. They often take shelter in homes and Churches rather than official camps, as these are often also quite persecutory. Taking just from official camps would exclude them.
Barnabas fund is supporting safe havens, with the support of some prominent clergy:
My apologies, I wasn't referring just to official camps necessarily - in fact I was not even aware there were official and unofficial camps. If you note I made no mention of 'official' camps in my original posting. It is not beyond the wit of those organising airlifts of refugees into the UK to make sure that as many people as possible get an equal chance to be considered. What is important is that the refugees are taken from camps in the countries bordering the war zone rather than accepted once they have taken up the offer of the smugglers and made dangerous journeys into the heart of Europe.
The Archbishop has been directly raising the issue with the PM:
Syrian Christians are least likely to be able to return to their homes, least safe in refugee camps (as these are often Islamist recruiting gounds) and most likely to assimilate here. To me it is a no-brainer to give them priority over the young men in Calais.
Some of the most persecuted are the middle east Christians. They often take shelter in homes and Churches rather than official camps, as these are often also quite persecutory. Taking just from official camps would exclude them.
Barnabas fund is supporting safe havens, with the support of some prominent clergy:
My apologies, I wasn't referring just to official camps necessarily - in fact I was not even aware there were official and unofficial camps. If you note I made no mention of 'official' camps in my original posting. It is not beyond the wit of those organising airlifts of refugees into the UK to make sure that as many people as possible get an equal chance to be considered. What is important is that the refugees are taken from camps in the countries bordering the war zone rather than accepted once they have taken up the offer of the smugglers and made dangerous journeys into the heart of Europe.
The Archbishop has been directly raising the issue with the PM:
Syrian Christians are least likely to be able to return to their homes, least safe in refugee camps (as these are often Islamist recruiting gounds) and most likely to assimilate here. To me it is a no-brainer to give them priority over the young men in Calais.
Absolutely agree. Lord Weidenfeld is raising money to help persecuted Christians in the Middle East.
I still think that this is a pointless and potentially harmful piece of legislation but you cannot deny that Osborne is getting his money's worth in humiliating the Labour party.
There are times when I wonder if Osborne is actually very nice. Tonight is one of those times.
@paulwaugh: Lab whips cautioning not to get too excited if 45 abstentions tonight; 15 MPs 'slipped' to be away. But still cd be 30 'active' abstentions
I'm in two minds here - yes, this charter business does appear to be a gimmck. But on the other hand, I find it hard to conceive of a situation wherein Corbyn's Labour would ever consider a reduction in spending as acceptable.
It is because of the real sense of despair that I almost feel sorry for the sensible members of the Labour party. Almost for a second and then the laughter starts. We have now had months of this from Labour with many many months to look forward to. The Conservatives are actually struggling to be noticed in News and Political programmes. There are just so many car crashes going on inside Labour. But NickMP thinks its fine...
@paulwaugh: Lab whips cautioning not to get too excited if 45 abstentions tonight; 15 MPs 'slipped' to be away. But still cd be 30 'active' abstentions
Hang on, wasn't this meant to be a three-line whip? Or don't Labour do that kind of thing anymore?
On a brighter note, it seems that the Labour Party are ready to win back Scotland due to what they see as an utterly incompetent and failing SNP administration.
I still think that this is a pointless and potentially harmful piece of legislation but you cannot deny that Osborne is getting his money's worth in humiliating the Labour party.
There are times when I wonder if Osborne is actually very nice. Tonight is one of those times.
Nice to his friends
Let's remember this labour leadership is actively friends with the IRA and other terrorists. It's a labour leadership where Diane Abbott seems to be the de facto number 3
If this was a boxing match it would have been stopped. .
Some would argue there are matches that are stopped far too early, when the boxer under a flurry of blows was in fact fine and would have rallied if the refs hadn't called it too soon.
Some would argue there are matches that are stopped far too early, when the boxer under a flurry of blows was in fact fine and would have rallied if the refs hadn't called it too soon.
Yes, Labour are going to rally at the end of this debate...
On a brighter note, it seems that the Labour Party are ready to win back Scotland due to what they see as an utterly incompetent and failing SNP administration.
If this was a boxing match it would have been stopped. .
Some would argue there are matches that are stopped far too early, when the boxer under a flurry of blows was in fact fine and would have rallied if the refs hadn't called it too soon.
Some of the most persecuted are the middle east Christians. They often take shelter in homes and Churches rather than official camps, as these are often also quite persecutory. Taking just from official camps would exclude them.
Barnabas fund is supporting safe havens, with the support of some prominent clergy:
My apologies, I wasn't referring just to official camps necessarily - in fact I was not even aware there were official and unofficial camps. If you note I made no mention of 'official' camps in my original posting. It is not beyond the wit of those organising airlifts of refugees into the UK to make sure that as many people as possible get an equal chance to be considered. What is important is that the refugees are taken from camps in the countries bordering the war zone rather than accepted once they have taken up the offer of the smugglers and made dangerous journeys into the heart of Europe.
The Archbishop has been directly raising the issue with the PM:
Syrian Christians are least likely to be able to return to their homes, least safe in refugee camps (as these are often Islamist recruiting gounds) and most likely to assimilate here. To me it is a no-brainer to give them priority over the young men in Calais.
Absolutely agree. Lord Weidenfeld is raising money to help persecuted Christians in the Middle East.
(BTW I hope to be at the next PB meet.)
I agree, however the downside might make them an even more persecuted group. It would be sad to see us throw in the towel on Christianity in the mid east, but if we could take them all then we should. The sectarian divide would of course be ever wider.
Some would argue there are matches that are stopped far too early, when the boxer under a flurry of blows was in fact fine and would have rallied if the refs hadn't called it too soon.
Yes, Labour are going to rally at the end of this debate...
Surely what matters is how many are unhappy enough to do something about it, and whether this debate will impact on that number? If the situation does not get worse, then they have potential to rally as a party. I don't say it is likely, merely curious if things will actually get worse, or if they are treading water and thus giving themselves a chance later.
I still think that this is a pointless and potentially harmful piece of legislation but you cannot deny that Osborne is getting his money's worth in humiliating the Labour party.
There are times when I wonder if Osborne is actually very nice. Tonight is one of those times.
Comments
5 times
Overall, I'd say Corbyn's ratings are poor, but not as poor as might have been expected.
Corbyn has come up with some stuff along the same lines.
Interesting, and 'good for them' if they are prepared to admit that from time to time as a maverick back-bencher they may have spouted absolute nonsense.
McDonnell has made a few somewhat risible claims about his economic expertise. If he steps back, takes the responsibility seriously, and looks afresh at issues that he really might shape then he gets well onto the first rung of some degree of respect from my point of view.
If Labour were to reposition themselves as the party of careful examination of the facts, and decisions based on those facts primarily they'd even risk getting my vote.
Bit worried with about the Corbyn fella, resurrected from the back-benches, and paying for our political sins. Beardy too!
http://www.unhcr.org/4b0507139.pdf
"Due to the geographical limitation to the 1951 Refugee Convention maintained by the Government of Turkey, under which it is not obliged to apply the Convention to refugees from
outside Europe, UNHCR plays a critical role in addressing the protection needs of all non-European asylum-seekers in the country. The Office intervenes with the Turkish authorities in
an effort to ensure that asylum-seekers are not detained or subjected to and are given access to national procedures for “temporary asylum”. For those in need of international protection, UNHCR pursues durable solutions, particularly resettlement."
So in theory at least it could unleash all the current asylum-seekers in Turkey on Europe. It certainly doesn't need to accept those being returned by the EU.
Some of the most persecuted are the middle east Christians. They often take shelter in homes and Churches rather than official camps, as these are often also quite persecutory. Taking just from official camps would exclude them.
Barnabas fund is supporting safe havens, with the support of some prominent clergy:
https://barnabasfund.org/osh
1955
"Zac Goldsmith urged to withdraw paedophile ring allegations
Ex-Tory MP Harvey Proctor says Goldsmith should rethink mayoral bid unless he retracts claims of VIP abuse at Richmond guest house"
http://www.theguardian.com/uk
We PB Tories are rattled.
Perhaps that's why the Labour Party was invented - a good way to create fictional arguments where the Liberals actually appeared to have a more free trade, free market, lower corruption outlook. While most countries invoked laws over the last 100 years to prevent this sort of Cronyism, it continues as strongly as ever in the UK.
When did the UK last send an politician to jail for corruptly awarding contracts?
Love this band.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06hcdky/6-music-live-at-maida-vale-2015-new-order
https://t.co/oDP8a20qU7
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index#/media/File:Transparency_international_2014.png
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11860902/Archbishop-warns-Cameron-over-Syrian-refugees.html
Syrian Christians are least likely to be able to return to their homes, least safe in refugee camps (as these are often Islamist recruiting gounds) and most likely to assimilate here. To me it is a no-brainer to give them priority over the young men in Calais.
He just Point of Ordered Stewart Hosie to ask for a punch in the face...
There are times when I wonder if Osborne is actually very nice. Tonight is one of those times.
(BTW I hope to be at the next PB meet.)
Succeeded beyond Osborne's wildest dreams then...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-34527534
We should mainly shoot these people. Lord knows why we pay them to deliver nonsense.
There is something almost too cruel in this.
It's the New Politics...
Especially the smirk at 3.25 when he says he's got a busy diary and then looks to the sky.
Cathy Newman ✔ @cathynewman
If you missed my @RichardBurgon interview it's here http://on.fb.me/1yJVG7w
http://www.progressonline.org.uk/2008/01/25/while-the-snp-blunders-through-its-honeymoon-scottish-labour-is-quietly-renewing/
Oh wait, that's 2008...
It's a labour leadership where Diane Abbott seems to be the de facto number 3
Then the Liberal democrat stood up
This is more of a Ronda Rousey bout.
http://elxn-data.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/the-quiet-ones.html
The sectarian divide would of course be ever wider.
PoliticsHome ✔ @politicshome
Labour could back unilateral disarmament, says Shadow Defence Sec http://polho.me/1k4Uk6l pic.twitter.com/wC6xsXWQOa